Re: Brookings Area Thriving

Originally Posted by NWHSUandSDSU

I find the Sonia Sotomayor school interesting. If they talk and write only in Spanish, is it up the the parents to teach their children all of their English stuff until they join the other children in 6th grade.
I'm not saying that a second language is bad or that parents shouldn't be involved with their children's education but this seems a little overboard to me. As I've heard many times, "different strokes for different folks".
I have also heard that if you start the children out young, they pick things up much quicker than older person do so maybe it's not that bad.

they are taught 100% in Spanish with a few exceptions music, art and PE. Then in third grade they introduce English language learning in third grade. These kids will fall behind English learning behind other English speaking schools. They eventually catch up by about fifth grade. Since Spanish is not their native language different parts of the brain is used with learning and research shows better problem solving, spatial thought etc with students who are bilingual. We are told the best thing for our kids is to read 20 minutes per night in English and as you do that they will start associating what they learn in Spanish and English. We as parents aren't required to teach English curriculum like school at home. If any questions feel free to ask. I hope this make sense as I am not an eloquent writer.

This makes more sense to me. When I opened that attachment, I didn't see anything that said they started using any English in the third grade (or ever for that matter). That is why I assumed they didn't get taught any English until the sixth grade.

Re: Brookings Area Thriving

The attachment is showing research on benefits of immersion schools. It's not associated with SF school curriculum but since my daughter is in immersion program I know that is when English learning is started.

Re: Brookings Area Thriving

Originally Posted by SoDak

I think Brookings is doing a great job in the area of growth. I overstayed in Brookings after college and therefore postponed adulthood. I realize it doesn't work that way for most, but it did for me. Leaving there was the best thing for me and I'd never live in a college town again. This is not to say I like SF, which seems often like a college town, because I do not. It's changed remarkably in my lifetime, and I'm sort of done with it. We are looking in the south for something completely different.

I postponed my adulthood by enlisting in the US Navy for 4 years. I did not have any idea or a vision for my life 4 years later than I did the day enlisting. Its tough growing up, especially in the early twenties. Brookings did not have 3M, Dak, and Larson was barely a garage operation. when I left for the Navy in 1965, but over the years the opportunities have increased greatly and appear to getting better.

Re: Brookings Area Thriving

It is very relevant. I played basketball in their barn a few times with Van. He was a few years younger. Their family goes back to shortly after 1879 when the railroad was built through Brookings and the town grew up from nothing. I think some of the businesses from Medary where moved to the now Brookings townsite.

Re: Brookings Area Thriving

I read an article in the Watertown PO this week about one of our mayoral candidates, in the article the mayoral candidate stated that since 2014 Watertown's total gross sales have dropped by $345 million and Brookings have increased by $700 million.

Re: Brookings Area Thriving

Originally Posted by BigGoosie13

I read an article in the Watertown PO this week about one of our mayoral candidates, in the article the mayoral candidate stated that since 2014 Watertown's total gross sales have dropped by $345 million and Brookings have increased by $700 million.

Big Goosie's report is accurate – that's what the candidate said at a public outing. I think, however, the candidate's numbers were not completely accurate (I think the candidate had a math error, not an intentional misstatement – the gross sales of Brookings have dramatically increased over the past couple of years with the addition of the new businesses including, for example, Bell Brands). Gross sales tell us something but it may be a little hard to draw a lot of conclusions. I think a more telling number when looking at information from the SD Dept of Revenue, is municipal tax collections – that's the primary source of funding that keeps a municipality in business. The same issue of the WPO that reported the candidate's statement also included a news item (on a different page) showing the 2016 municipal tax collections compared to 2015, for the 10 largest municipalities in South Dakota. Watertown remains at fourth, Brookings is fifth.

Here are those numbers. First I list the 2016 collections, then the figure for 2015, followed by the percentage change.

Sioux Falls $128,232,421.12; $124,401,484.81; 3.08%

Rapid City 59,655,455.87; 56,914,344.15; 1.26%

Aberdeen 18,036,770.26; 18,128,317.65; (0.50)%

Watertown 15,293,316.26; 15,355,462.91; (0.40)%

Brookings 14,206,773.23; 13,585,303.63 4.57%

Mitchell 11,852,163.73; 12,006,964.63 (1.29)%

Yankton 9,593,221.16; 9,421,972.01 1.82%

Pierre 9,525,442.20; 8,168,936.70 4.36

Spearfish 8,212,415.69; 8,196,372.31 0.20%

Huron 7,312,020.35; 6,922,226.50 5.63%

The numbers show Aberdeen, Watertown and Mitchell had a drop from 2015 to 2016. Huron had the largest percentage increase followed by Brookings. Considering the starting point – the 2015 numbers – that's a healthy increase for Brookings.

Re: Brookings Area Thriving

Originally Posted by JackJD

Big Goosie's report is accurate – that's what the candidate said at a public outing. I think, however, the candidate's numbers were not completely accurate (I think the candidate had a math error, not an intentional misstatement – the gross sales of Brookings have dramatically increased over the past couple of years with the addition of the new businesses including, for example, Bell Brands). Gross sales tell us something but it may be a little hard to draw a lot of conclusions. I think a more telling number when looking at information from the SD Dept of Revenue, is municipal tax collections – that's the primary source of funding that keeps a municipality in business. The same issue of the WPO that reported the candidate's statement also included a news item (on a different page) showing the 2016 municipal tax collections compared to 2015, for the 10 largest municipalities in South Dakota. Watertown remains at fourth, Brookings is fifth.

Here are those numbers. First I list the 2016 collections, then the figure for 2015, followed by the percentage change.

Sioux Falls $128,232,421.12; $124,401,484.81; 3.08%

Rapid City 59,655,455.87; 56,914,344.15; 1.26%

Aberdeen 18,036,770.26; 18,128,317.65; (0.50)%

Watertown 15,293,316.26; 15,355,462.91; (0.40)%

Brookings 14,206,773.23; 13,585,303.63 4.57%

Mitchell 11,852,163.73; 12,006,964.63 (1.29)%

Yankton 9,593,221.16; 9,421,972.01 1.82%

Pierre 9,525,442.20; 8,168,936.70 4.36

Spearfish 8,212,415.69; 8,196,372.31 0.20%

Huron 7,312,020.35; 6,922,226.50 5.63%

The numbers show Aberdeen, Watertown and Mitchell had a drop from 2015 to 2016. Huron had the largest percentage increase followed by Brookings. Considering the starting point – the 2015 numbers – that's a healthy increase for Brookings.

GO HURON!!!

I figured the numbers might be exaggerated just because of the fact that politicians are gonna politic when it comes to politics.

Thanks for the numbers, it really does show how big the SF economy is compared to the rest of the state. It also shows how potent the I-29 corridor is economically.

Re: Brookings Area Thriving

My point is that the figures, in my view, were subject to "interpretation" (some call that "spin" while others will call it something else). I think the figures involved multiplying gross sales figures by a multiple (I think most Chambers of Commerce like to use a factor of anywhere from three to seven to calculate how many times a dollar turns over in a community). I think the candidate who is quoted in the paper is not trying to intentionally bend the truth or exaggerate the numbers.